By an Ex Railway Officer

After I read the letter from the former General Manager, Railways, Mr. Amarasuriya, in ‘The Island’ newspaper of 12.04.2001 on the above subject, I thought I would also make a few comments on this matter.

Mr. Amarasuriya, an experienced Civil Engineer, with his expertise on Railway matters has made revealing observations on the procurement of the 8 locomotives from India a few years ago. I sincerely hope that this will draw the attention of the new Minister in charge of Railways.

Mr. A, in his letter has suggested an investigation into the technical inconsistencies involved in the purchase of the 8 locomotives. In such an event, may I also suggest the following aspects of the matter be looked into in arriving at the findings.

i. Why were the stipulated specifications not adhered to in the procurement of the 8 locomotives as a requirement for use on both upcountry as well as low-country tracks of the Railway?

ii. Were there two separate sets of specifications to be followed — one for locomotives to be used on upcountry rail tracks and another for low country rail tracks?

iii. When the bridges (except the few recent ones) were designed, it was to carry only up to 16 1/2 ton axle loads, and also with the risk of causing rail fractures by heavier loads, particularly on the Coast Line where corrosion is intense, why were locomotives with higher axle loads accepted, even if they were meant for use on the low country tracks?

iv. If funds were available, from whatever source, why were they not utilised more profitably on urgent track repairs and rehabilitation work where there is a crying need for carrying out such work.

v. It may also be necessary to ascertain as to who is responsible for incurring the heavy expenditure on such unsuitable purchases for the railway?

The findings of such investigations should be made known to the general public as they suffer the consequences of such blatant errors. The public will also be interested to know what remedial measures are contemplated to rectify matters.

Another matter is, if higher speeds, as mentioned by Mr. A, are contemplated, such should be applicable only to express trains catering to long distance train travellers to reach destinations such as Galle on the Coast Line, Anuradhapura on the Northern Line and Kandy on the main line, restricting the number of stops between to the barest minimum. However, before attempting to introduce trains at higher speeds, it is imperative that tracks are adequately strengthened. Laying of concrete sleepers, without a proper system of ballasting, and refixing rails on them alone will not constitute proper tracks even to meet present speeds.

Other matters, such as the futility of new railway extensions projects, need no comments as Mr. A. has dealt with this aspect in his letter.

I must finally say that if such revelations, whether palatable or not, are to be expected from those who are knowledgeable, they should be amply rewarded; unless the matters referred to are considered trivial and not worth probing into.